Lot
42, "Portrait of Prince Willem II of Orange as a Young Boy with a Dog,"
by Sir Anthony van Dyck, oil on canvas, 50 1/2 by 39 1/2 inches

By
Carter B. Horsley

The Master
Paintings Evening Auction February 1, 2018 at Sotheby's New York has an
excellent group of paintings, several of which are museum-quality, and
is
highlighted a superb portrait of a child by van Dyck, a great and large
and very dramatic Titian, a lovely portrait
of a woman by Reynolds, a good portraits by Velasquez, Cranach and
Hals, and fine works by Canaletto, Allori, Lorenzetti, Robert
and David Roberts.
The catalogue contains numerous lengthy and brilliant essays on many of
the lots.
Lot 42 is the extremely charming and very fine "Portrait of Prince
Willem II of Orange as a Young Boy with a Dog" by Sir Anthony van Dyck,
an oil on canvas that measures 50 1/2 by 39 1/2 inches.
The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Two versions
of this charming painting by van Dyck are recorded in period sources,
one painted for the parents of Prince Willem II, and another version
made for King Charles I of England. The portrait painted for the
sitter’s parent descended in the family and is today in the Schloss
Mosigkau museum....This fascinating painting’s recent reappearance,
followed by a careful cleaning and subsequent public exhibition at the
Rubenshuis Museum in Antwerp, has afforded scholars the opportunity to
reassess it, confirming its status as an important work by the master,
which in all likelihood is the hitherto lost painting documented as
made by van Dyck for King Charles I of England.

"Although they make up only a fraction of his considerable and varied
artistic output, van Dyck’s depictions of children are among the most
memorable and enchanting works that the artist ever produced.
This delightful portrait of Prince Willem II of Orange exemplifies the
genre. It depicts the young Prince at about 5½ years wearing a
long gown of golden orange silk (the color of his princely house) with
slashed sleeves, decorated with lace collar and cuffs. He wears a
plumed cap of black velvet and stands in a relaxed and elegant pose,
gazing to his right as does his dog, as if someone is drawing their
attention. Van Dyck deftly indicates the young Prince’s lineage
with a symbolic orange tree at the left, while behind hangs a rich
tapestry arras, rendered in flickering brushstrokes, and embroidered
with the arms and lion of the House of Nassau.

"In the winter of 1631/32, van Dyck set north from Antwerp to the court
of The Hague, having been summoned by Frederick Hendrick, Prince of
Orange, an invitation that only served to boost his already
considerable reputation. He arrived before 28th January 1632,
when no less a personage than Constantijn Huygens noted that he had
just that day been sitting to the painter. In addition to the
Dutch prince’s patronage, van Dyck no doubt hoped to broaden his
prospects, not only by leaving the confines and limitations of his
native city, but also with an eye to a move across the Channel to the
English court. King Charles I’s agent Balthasar Gerbier had been
assiduously wooing the painter for some time, attempting to secure his
services, and while a final decision had not been made, one was
imminent. In addition, Prince Frederick Hendrik and his
wife Amalia van Solms hosted Elizabeth Stuart, the deposed Queen of
Bohemia, who was Charles I’s sister. Thus, van Dyck’s arrival
appears to be a canny decision, not only for the commissions it
afforded, but as a way to ingratiate himself further with the Stuart
dynasty. Van Dyck would, in fact, arrive in England just a short time
afterwards, in April 1632 where, save for occasional sojourns, he would
remain for the rest of his life in the service of the King.

"While in The Hague, van Dyck painted portraits of the ruling family,
Frederick Hendrik, Prince of Orange (...Baltimore Museum of Art...) and
Amalia van Solms (...Tokyo Fuji Museum, Tokyo, Japan), as well as their
eldest son and heir, Willem II (...Schloss Mosigkau, near Dessau,
Germany). Perhaps unfettered by the courtly expectations required of an
image for a sitting monarch, the painting of Willem II is both formal
and informal at the same time, and shows van Dyck’s extraordinary
abilities to their most potent effect. Van Dyck captures
perfectly the innocence of a young boy, but sacrifices nothing of his
nobility in doing do. Drawing on the influence of Titian, notably
his portrait of Clarice Strozzi (...Gemäldegalerie, Berlin), van Dyck
developed a pictorial language for the depiction of young nobles which
was to influence artists such as Gainsborough, Reynolds and Sargent in
the centuries to come.

"In addition to the aforementioned set ordered by Prince Frederik, van
Dyck was commissioned by King Charles I, whose eldest daughter Mary was
to marry Willem nine years later, to complete a further set:

"Sir Anthony vandike hath by o’ Command made and presented us wth
divers pictures…of the Prince of Orange…another of the princesse of
Orange wth another of their sonne at half length at Twenty pounds
appeece.

"Payment for these were authorized in a Royal Warrant dated 8th August
1632. The reference to ‘half length’ portraits was evidently
shorthand for the whole group, two of which were true half lengths – an
inference confirmed by the reference at the sale of King Charles I’s
collection in 1652 (No. 278), where it was described as ‘A Dutch Prince
at length wth a dog’.

"A full length studio or later copy of the composition is preserved at
Petworth, where the dog appears to adhere to the type in the present
example, rather than the Mosigkau picture. The breed of the dog,
which appears to be a whippet cross, is more robust and muscular in the
present painting, and also has a more pronounced snout, thus suggesting
that it was the prototype brought to England and furnished the template
for the Petworth copy. No other autograph version of this composition
is recorded.

"The present Portrait of Willem II of Orange is thus almost certainly
the recorded version painted for King Charles I. The relationship
between the Mosigkau version and the present canvas is particularly
fascinating and informative. The condition of the Dessau picture has
been somewhat compromised in the past, but it is clear that the
painting does have similar handling of paint to the present work.
Perhaps the most striking difference between the two versions is in the
quality and characterization of the dog, which is finer and
anatomically more sophisticated in the present painting. Pentiments
also exist in the present composition. Some, such as that along
the contour of the Prince’s collar in front of the tapestry, as well as
subtle shifts in the hands, and around the dog’s head and legs are
visible to the naked eye, while infra-red technology further reveals
the freedom and spontaneity with which it was painted. While it
is perhaps pointless to discuss primacy in the case of two pictures
which would have been produced either simultaneously or nearly so,
these details would suggest that the present composition may indeed be
the first version. In light of the importance of King Charles I
to van Dyck from 1632 onwards, and his reputation as a connoisseur,
this would not be surprising.

"The portraits of the Orange family painted for Charles I remained in
the Royal Collection until after the execution of Charles when the
collection was sold by the Commonwealth in one of the most famous art
dispersals in history. On 1st March, 1652, as lot 278, ‘A Dutch Prince
at length, with a dog,’ presumably the present painting, was sold to
Edward Bass and John Hunt, both creditors of the late king. Edward Bass
was a royal official under Charles I who, together with John Hunt was
one of a handful of insiders who purchased a large quantity of the late
King’s goods, and were amongst the chief beneficiaries of the sale.
Bass headed no fewer than three of the fourteen ‘dividends’ (syndicates
created by the King’s creditors, formed for the purpose of taking goods
in lieu of payment), while Hunt (a former linen draper to Queen
Henrietta Maria) was one of the sale’s treasurers. In addition to van
Dyck’s portrait of Prince Willem II, Edward Bass also owned the jewel
of the Royal Collection - Raphael’s Holy Family, ‘La Perla,’ now at the
Museo del Prado. Bass was one of the ‘undoubted winners in the sale’
who formed part of the group of ‘cosmopolitan artists, dealers and
merchants’ who were ‘the real specialists in money and art, and
employed by all sides – crown, republic, dividends and foreign
embassies’.....

"As with so many paintings from the Royal Collection, the Portrait of
Willem II as well as those of his parents were subsequently dispersed,
and remained untraced for many years. A label on the reverse of
the present painting is inscribed with the name of Michael Humble,
possibly Michael Humble of Gwersyllt Park, Denbighshire Wales. The
reverse of the stretcher is also inscribed with the name B.J. Palmer.
Bartlett Joshua Palmer (1882–1961), of Davenport, Iowa, was one of the
founders of modern chiropractic practice. He amassed a large collection
of art and Asian antiquities, which was on view at his clinic at
Davenport.

"We are grateful to Dr Malcolm Rogers, Professor Christopher Brown and
Dr Susan Barnes for each independently confirming the attribution
of the present painting to Sir Anthony van Dyck based on their first
hand inspection."

It has an estimate
of $2,000,000 to $3,000,000. It
sold for $2,415,500 including the
buyer's premium as do all results mentioned in this article.

The sale total was $48,369,350
27,234.000 with about 77 percent of the offered 73 lots selling.

A much
less interesting and flamboyant van Dyck painting is Lot 24, "Portrait
of an Italian Nobleman," an oil on canvas that measures 47 1/4 by 35
inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"This dashing
portrait was almost certainly executed by Anthony van Dyck in Genoa,
where the artist made several visits during the years 1621 to 1627.
Unknown to scholars until now, the picture has been in private
ownership for over forty years and thus never exhibited publicly, nor
known to the compilers of the authoritative 2004 monograph on van Dyck.
It has never appeared at auction, and its reemergence onto the
marketplace as one of the extremely rare signed and dated portraits
from the artist’s brief Italian period marks a rare occurrence.

"Bellori, van Dyck's early biographer, pronounced in 1672 that
'travelling in other parts of Italy, he always came back to Genoa as if
it were his own country, where he was known and loved by everyone.'1
The painter’s characterful and dramatic approach to portraiture saw him
gain a vast amount of commissions from wealthy Italian patrons. Their
particular desire for lavish and elegant costume portraits was realized
by the talented Fleming, whose experience gained here served as a
useful platform for his successful later career as portrait painter to
the courts of northern Europe. In this regard van Dyck distinguished
himself from his mentor Rubens in that in Italy, perhaps surprisingly
for a painter of his renown, he did not align himself with a specific
court or patron. Rather, he embraced a traveling mentality which kept
him busy on a variety of private commissions for the local nobility.
This bespoke, independent identity is the primary reason why portraits
occupy the vast majority of his Italian output. Above all else, it was
Titian whom van Dyck used as his primary point of inspiration for his
Italian portraits. By 1626 when van Dyck painted this work, Genoa, and
indeed much of the territory outside of Venice was filled with works by
the Venetian master for van Dyck's consumption. Van Dyck's Italian
sketchbook makes clear his intense observation of Titian's portraits
and their dual pursuit of accurate artifice and personality. Such a
pursuit positioned van Dyck as a key bridge between Titian and
Velazquez, who in 1629 began a brief, but incredibly impactful year and
a half trip through Italy.

"An unsigned copy after this work is in the Musée du Louvre (inv. R.F.
1942 – 34). Both this canvas and the Louvre copy have both
traditionally identified the sitter as Olivio Odescalchi (1655-1713),
the nephew of Pope Innocent XI and legendary collector, but this
identification is impossible given the dating of our picture to 1626.
Instead, the sitter should be identified as a well-heeled nobleman, who
would have undoubtedly paid a large sum for this portrait owing to van
Dyck’s growing popularity by this point in his blossoming career. The
coat of arms at upper right as thus far not been identified, though it
does not belong to one of the more prominent and firmly identified
Genoese families.

"Of the Italian period portraits by van Dyck, almost none are signed
and dated. A dated (1624) example, traditionally identified as
Desiderio Segno...in the Collections of the Prince of Liechtenstein,
employs a near identical format and hand-writing. As in the
Liechtenstein portrait, the sitter here also wears a simple yet refined
black silk jacket with contrasting white lace collar and cuffs. Van
Dyck's mastery of material is on full display here, particularly in the
luxuriously draped left arm that shines through his deft ability to
apply subtle variations of white and grey against the rich black
paint."

The lot has an estimate of $800,000 to $1,200,000. It sold for $975,000.

Lot
48, "Portrait of Monsignor Cristoforo Segni, Maggiordomo to Pope
Innocent X," is an oil on canvas by Diego Rodriguez de Silva y
Velasquez (1599-1660) and Pietro Matire Neri (1601-1661). It
measures 44 7/8 by 36 1/4 inches. It was included in the 2015 exhibition
on Velasquez at the Grand Palais in Paris.

The catalogue provides the
following interesting commentary:

"This striking portrait of
Cristoforo Segni, Maggiordomo to Pope Innocent X from 1645 to 1653, was
painted by Velázquez during the artist’s second trip to Rome, around
1650. Parts of the painting were executed by the Cremonese painter
Pietro Martire Neri, who according to Antonio Palomino worked alongside
Velázquez during his second sojourn in the Eternal City. The painting
has only recently emerged from obscurity, for inclusion in the recent
exhibition dedicated to Velázquez at the Grand Palais, Paris, having
remained hidden in the present collection since the mid-twentieth
century. During the second half of the nineteenth century it formed
part of the illustrious collections assembled by the Marqués de
Salamanca in Madrid, who owned several works by the great Sevillian
master and whose collection was dispersed at auctions in Paris during
the 1860s and 1870s.

"In his celebrated Museo Optico of 1725 the biographer
and painter Palomino recorded that Velázquez painted the Majordomo to
Pope Innocent X, and it was Cruzada Villaamil in 1885 who first
established the clear link between Palomino’s reference and the present
work. As Maggiordomo to His Holiness Pope Innocent X, Cristoforo Segni
was a high-ranking member of the clergy appointed by the Pope to
oversee the apostolic palaces. Segni was one of the first members of
the Pope’s entourage with whom Velázquez came into contact, for as
recorded by Palomino, the artist stayed at Segni’s family house in
Bologna in 1649 during his journey to Rome. Segni was also a patron of
the sculptor Alessandro Algardi, from whom Velázquez had commissioned
works on behalf of Philip IV, and as such the two had various matters
in common.

"Velázquez had come to Rome in May
1649, bearing paintings as gifts for Innocent X on the occasion of his
Jubilee, which began on the 25 December 1649. This was his second visit
to Italy, following an earlier trip in 1629-31. He reached Rome via
Genoa, Milan, Venice and Florence, but once in the Eternal City his
stay was interrupted only by visits to Naples and Gaeta in June-July
1649 and again in March 1650. He did not leave again for Madrid until
1651, but his work in Rome in that year was probably confined only to
official business. There is no doubt that this short period represents
the first unquestioned highpoint of his art, when his creativity and
sheer technical virtuosity reached new peaks. The exact chronology of
Velázquez’s Roman portraits is not known for certain, but they were
presumably all painted in a very short period between his arrival in
May 1649 and November 1650. If we are to believe his biographer
Palomino, his first work was a portrait of his mulatto servant Juan de
Pareja (New York, Metropolitan Museum...). Perhaps, as Palomino
suggests, this was intended as an exercise in portraiture from the life
in a city where his work was almost unknown. In any event this
magnificent likeness, with its astonishing intensity of expression and
bravura yet restrained technique caused universal admiration when
exhibited at the Pantheon in 1650. Whether from the success of this
work or more likely from the access Velázquez had to the Papal court as
a result of his position as painter to the King of Spain, it was soon
followed by his portrait of Pope Innocent X himself (Rome, Galleria
Doria Pamphilij). This was presumably Velázquez’s first ‘official’
commission in Rome, and may have been commissioned by the King himself.
This exceptional masterpiece won universal admiration – even the
Pontiff himself admitted that the piercing likeness was almost 'too
truthful.' Sir Joshua Reynolds writing over a century later would
describe it as 'one of the first portraits in the world' and its
position as one of the greatest evocations of position and personality
ever achieved remains as true to this day as it was then. Although its
design was firmly in a tradition going back through Titian to Raphael,
in particular the former’s Portrait of Pope Paul III of 1543 (Naples,
Gallerie Nazionale, Capodimonte), its strength and immediacy is won by
its remarkable chromatic brilliance, achieved by a subtle range of
harmonised crimsons and reds, offset by a brilliant creamy white. Both
portraits are said to have been mistaken in real life for their
sitters, but while this is no doubt apocryphal, they clearly impressed
his contemporaries sufficiently to win Velázquez admission both to the
Accademia di San Lucca in January 1650 and subsequently the
Congregazione dei Virtuosi in the Pantheon. To this day they remain
without doubt among his very greatest works. If one were to add to them
the celebrated Toilet of Venus (London, National Gallery), better known
as the ‘Rokeby’ Venus after a later owner, which some critics also
believe to have been painted while Velázquez was in Rome rather than
just prior to his stay there, then it would be quite reasonable to
claim these as the most remarkable and important years of the painter’s
career. As it was, Velázquez had few if any rivals as a court
portraitist in Rome at the time of the Papal jubilee. His greatest
contemporaries in terms of portraiture were both sculptors –
Gianlorenzo Bernini and Alessandro Algardi – and within a short while
he enjoyed enormous respect and prestige and his assimilation into the
artistic life of the city Rome was complete.

"This portrait of Cristoforo Segni
belongs to a small group of likenesses of sitters drawn from the ranks
of the papal court that no doubt followed on from the success of the
portrait of Innocent himself. These include those of the Pope’s adopted
nephew Cardinal Camillo Astalli, known as Cardinal Pamphilij (New York,
Hispanic Society of America) and Monsignor Camillo Massimi (National
Trust, Bankes Collection, Kingston Lacy). Cardinal Astalli’s portrait
can be dated to shortly after September 1650, when he was raised to the
purple. Like Segni, the papal Chamberlain Massimi was a friend of the
artist, and a man of considerable learning as well as a collector, who
would eventually come to own no less than six works by Velázquez
himself. The stylistic and compositional parallels between these works
and that of the Pope are quite clear. The design of Segni’s portrait is
clearly indebted, albeit in reverse, to that of Innocent X, with the
sitter seated in a chair and holding a letter. In terms of colour and
handling, and indeed character, the portrait comes closer to those of
Cardinal Pamphilij and to that of Massimi in particular. Velázquez’s
portrayal of the heads of these two far from handsome men is
immediately striking. Their black birettas and blue camariere segreti
are set off against a dull crimson chair adorned with gold braid,
enlivened with the sharp contrast with the white of collar or sleeves.
Their features are constructed with no outline or drawing, and through
colour alone Velázquez creates the impression of keen and intelligent
men, whose gaze is piercing yet still friendly. Though none of these
works ever quite matched the sheer brilliance of Juan de Pareja or
Innocent X, they remain eloquent testament to Velázquez’s newfound
maturity and complete mastery of style.

"Aside from his own workshop
activities in Madrid, Velázquez is not known to have ever collaborated
with another artist. Palomino named only Velázquez as the painter of
Segni’s portrait, and the sitter holds in his right hand a letter
indicating Velázquez’s authorship including a signature in the shadow
of the sitter’s thumb. Squeezed below it, in a space not obviously
intended for inscription and seemingly as an afterthought, Neri’s name
is also inscribed. The genesis of the commission is not known, but
leading scholars think it likely that the work was conceived entirely
by Velázquez with the composition and figure of Segni mapped out by
him. Velázquez is certainly responsible for the execution of the head
of the Maggiordomo; the painterly modelling and characterful expression
also strongly indicating that it was painted dal vivo. It seems
possible that the portrait was left unfinished on Velázquez’s departure
from Rome, requiring its completion by another artist (in this case one
that had a close association with Velázquez), rather than having been
planned from the start as a work by both painters. The first time that
the names of the two painters are mentioned together is when they both
attended a meeting of the congregation of the Virtuosi al Pantheon that
took place on 9 March 1650. This was a society founded in Rome in the
sixteenth century, whose artist members – the virtuosi – were painters,
sculptors and architects. Their aim was to carry out charitable works
and promote the fine arts to the glory of the faith. Velázquez is
recorded as participating in the congregation’s meetings since 22
February of that year. Relatively little is known even about the life
of Pietro Martire Neri. A pupil of Malosso in his native Cremona, he
spent a period of nearly two decades in Mantua, where he came under the
influence of Domenico Fetti (1589-1623), before finally leaving for
Rome. He was possibly briefly in Rome around 1629 and is then
documented there between 1647 and his death in 1661. Giuseppe
Bresciani, in his La virtù ravvivata
de Cremonesi insigni pittori, ingegneri &c… of 1665, is the
first to document his association with the Spanish painter. The precise
nature of his relationship and of his work with Velázquez is unclear.

"The four painted portraits by
Neri now known are all closely dependent upon Velázquez’s of Innocent X
and certainly the present work echoes the overall mise-en-scène of the
Doria Pamphilj painting, although the conventional pose does not
necessarily confirm the primacy of one or the other. Copies of the
latter by Neri survive in the collection of the Marquess of Bute at
Mount Stuart House in Scotland and in the Escorial in Madrid, where the
same figure is shown full-length with an attendant cleric. The prelate
in the latter has tentatively been identified as Monsignor Pietro
Vidoni (1610-1681) on the basis of an engraving after Neri of him as a
Cardinal in 1660. Vidoni had been summoned to Rome by Innocent X in
1652 before being appointed papal nuncio in Poland, and this portrait
may therefore date to this time as well as suggesting that Vidoni
himself commissioned the copy. A third copy by Neri, signed and
inscribed, was sold London, Christie’s, 9 December 1989, lot 119. These
copies remain the sole evidence we have of Neri’s relationship with
Velázquez. The recent attribution of a Portrait of Velázquez in Paris,
where the painter is shown with a palette and brush and wearing the
robes of the Order of Santiago (to which Velázquez was appointed in
1659) and which is clearly dependent upon the latter’s self-portrait in
his celebrated canvas of Las Meninas
of 1656 (Madrid, Museo del Prado) seems to be in a looser style than in
his signed works and must await further study.

"The precise extent of Velázquez’s
involvement in this portrait has been the subject of debate among
scholars over the years. Justi praised the quality of the head, while
considering the remainder of the portrait to be by Neri, an assessment
broadly supported by Mayer, who also accepted the signature as being
that of Velázquez. Voss believed the work to be by Velázquez, in
particular the head, the inscription and the overall composition,
inspired by his celebrated portrait of Pope Innocent X. When exhibited
at the Casón del Buen Retiro in 1960–61, the author of the exhibition
catalogue suggested the painting was begun by Velázquez and retouched
by Neri, who added his name at the bottom of the letter in the sitter’s
hand. Harris, however, considered the work to be entirely by Neri:
either the painting recorded by Palomino, or after a lost original by
Velázquez (although it is unclear as to whether she saw it in the
original). López-Rey took a broadly similar view, ascribing the
painting in its entirety to Neri, and believing it to be a copy after a
lost sketch by the master.

"Following the inclusion of the
painting in the exhibition at the Grand Palais, Paris, in 2015, the
overwhelming consensus amongst scholars today, including Dr. William B.
Jordan and Guillaume Kientz, is in support of the authorship by
Velázquez and Neri, endorsing opinions previously expressed by Salvator
Salort Pons and the late Alfonso Pérez Sánchez. Velázquez’s highly
expressive and distinctive brushwork is clearly evident in the head of
the sitter. It seems plausible he also painted the collar and some
scholars have speculated whether, in addition, he may have painted at
least part of the sleeves, while the rest of the costume, the hat, the
hands, the chair and curtain were probably added or worked up by Neri.
The distinctive and fluid rendering of the whites of the sleeves in the
painting would certainly seem to reflect the influence of painters such
as Domenico Fetti, with whom Neri seems to have been associated during
his years in Mantua, and suggest that these parts were in all
probability largely by him.

During the mid-nineteenth century the
painting belonged to the distinguished collection of the Marqués de
Salamanca (1811-1883). A highly successful businessman and financier
the Marqués became the Spanish Minister of Finance in 1847. A
passionate collector and patron of the arts, he assembled one of the
finest private collections of paintings in Spain, which he kept at his
newly built mansion, the Palacio de Recoletos in Madrid. First opened
to the public in 1858, the paintings collection was largely composed of
works from the seventeenth century, principally drawn from the Spanish,
Italian Dutch and Flemish schools. These included works by or
attributed to Raphael, Reni, Correggio and Mantegna, among them the
latter’s Saint Mark today in the Städel in Frankfurt-am-Main. Alongside
the Velázquez, his notable Spanish works included Murillo’ series of
the Prodigal Son (Dublin, National Gallery of Ireland) as well as
Zurbarán’s Annunciation (1650, Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of
Art), and no less than eight paintings by Goya, including the Bullfight
of 1808-12 which he purchased directly from the artist’s son Javier
(New York, Metropolitan Museum). The Dutch and Flemish pictures
numbered works by or attributed to Pieter Brueghel the Elder, Van Dyck,
Teniers and de Hooch, including Rubens’s Wrath of Achilles and Death of
Achilles today in the Courtauld Institute in London. His collection of
antiquities were housed in the Palacio de Vista Alegre which he
acquired in 1859, and the collection of Roman sculpture and Greek and
Etruscan objects was later bought en bloc by the Museo Arqueológico
Nacional in Madrid. His paintings collection was largely dispersed at
auction after he ran into financial difficulties in the 1860s. The
Portrait of Cristoforo Segni was included in his first sale in Paris in
1867, when it remained unsold, but was subsequently acquired in his
second auction at the Hôtel Drouot in 1875 by Luisa Gonzaléz. A
nineteenth-century copy after the painting exists today in a French
private collection; the copy includes the double signature and seems
likely to have been executed at the time of the great Salamanca sales.

"At the time of his 1924
monograph, August Mayer stated that this painting was in a Parisian
private collection. Twelve years later the same author named the owner
of the painting as the Duchesse de Dreyfus-Gonzales [sic]. The most
likely identification for the Duchess would be Anne de Talleyrand
Périgord, Duchess de Premio Real (1877-1945), the wife of Auguste
Dreyfus's second son Edouard Dreyfus-Gonzalez, Duke of Premio Real
(1846-1941). It is possible that the painting went unsold at the
Dreyfus sale of 1889 and remained in the Dreyfus-Gonzalez collection
until it is recorded there in the 1930s. It is not amongst the
paintings sold from the Dreyfus-Gonzalez collection in Paris on the 8th
June 1896. At the time of the Madrid exhibition of 1960/61 it was said
that the lender had recently acquired the picture from the Duchess de
Dreyfus-Gonzalez which may indicate that it remained in the possession
of the family until that time, perhaps in the collection of the
Duchesses sister Félicie de Talleyrand Perigord, Marquise de
Villahermosa (1878-1981). López-Rey cites a specific date of the 3
March 1958 as the point of sale, but if this were an auction then no
catalogue of it has yet been found."

The
lot has an estimate of $3,000,000 to $4,000,000. It sold for $4,066,0000.

Lot 27 is a large
and very impressive "Saint Margaret" by Titian (circa 1485-1576) and
workshop that is an oil on canvas that measures 78 by 66 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"This
monumental and visually arresting painting, which once formed part of
Charles I's collection and hung at Whitehall Palace in
London, with other works by Titian, depicts the heroic
Saint Margaret as she emerges unscathed from the body of the dragon. It
is considered by most scholars to have been painted in the mid-1560s,
and is one of two versions of the subject signed by Titian, the other
being in the Museo del Prado, Madrid. In its spirited execution,
enlivened by rapid brushstrokes and the dramatic contrasts of light
against dark, the painting embodies every quality of the artist's late
style.

"This
painting is first recorded in the English royal collection. It belonged
to King Charles I (1600–1649) and was displayed alongside the King's
most highly prized Titians at Whitehall. It is listed there
in the inventory of 1639 drawn up by Abraham van der Doort, as hanging
in the First Privy Lodging Room: ‘Done by Tichian/ Item the
Picture of St Margarett with a little reed cross in her left hand
triumphing over the Divell Being in a dragons Shape an intire figure
Soe bigg as ye life In a wodden guilded frame’. The Saint
Margaret hung in the principal room of Titians, with the early Pesaro
presented to Peter (Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten,
Antwerp) and other remarkable works such as Venus with
an Organist and The Allocution of the Marquis del Vasto to
his Troops (both Prado, Madrid); The Entombment of Christ, The Supper
at Emmaus and the 'Allegory of Alfonso d'Avalos' (all
three now at the Musée du Louvre, Paris); and Woman in a
Fur (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna).

"Soon
after the King's execution, the decision was taken by Parliament to
sell off his collections. Full inventories were drawn up
and valuations given with a view to the money raised from
their sale paying off the King's debts. The King's creditors were
entitled to acquire pictures; others were paid in goods from
Charles's estate. In the case of the Saint Margaret it
was sold to John Embry, a royal plumber, whose name appears on the
First List of the late King's servants and creditors comprising those
most in need. Francis Haskell in his essay on Charles I's
collection cites Embry's case as a representative example of a member
of the King's retinue who had remained unpaid. The present work,
which is listed in an inventory of pictures drawn up in
September 1649, was valued at £100. As Haskell
describes, Embry was owed £903 and was recompensed only
partly in cash. To cover the remaining sum he was allowed to
choose pictures to make up the value – among them the present
painting of Saint Margaret. According to Nuttall, of the
twenty-four pictures given to him as settlement of the debt, the Saint
Margaret was the most important. Presumably Embry's objective was
then to sell it as quickly as possible and convert it into
cash. During the Commonwealth Embry became Oliver Cromwell's
Surveyor-General of Works and subsequently, at the Restoration,
found himself obliged to defend his position,
returning a portion of the pictures to Charles II. The
picture is next recorded in Hampshire, in the collection of Richard
Norton (d. 1732), though it is not known how he acquired it. He may
have inherited it from his grandfather Colonel Norton (d. 1692).
The Saint Margaret then entered a British aristocratic
collection where it remained until the mid-twentieth century.

"The Saint
Margaret is likely to have been begun at the same time
as the Prado painting, which is generally recognised as the prime
version of the composition and dated to the mid-1560s. Indeed it
seems probable that the present work was painted alongside the version
now in the Prado, with Titian utilising his workshop to block in areas
of the painting but finishing the key areas of the painting
himself. The expressive power of Titian’s later style is nowhere
more clearly demonstrated than in the lyrical and atmospheric depiction
of the city of Venice on fire in the background. On the skyline
the campanile of St Mark glows in fiery orange and pinks, whilst the
stormy waves of the sea are animated by dark blue and green
brushstrokes. In the sky billowing smoke rises upwards to intermingle
with the clouds in a passage of painting that presages that of the
Impressionists, more than three centuries later.

"The
x-radiograph reveals much more vigorous application of paint in places
that now appear rather dark and flat, including the area to the left of
the head now covered with brown paint, and changes to the structure of
the dragon, as well as modifications to the city skyline. A
photograph of the painting taken at the time of the Harcourt sale in
1948 shows the larger extent of the canvas at the top edge of the
composition before it was reduced, at some point before 1958. The
composition was then more closely comparable to that of the Prado
version.

"As
is characteristic with Titian’s late works, the darker tones, fiery
landscape and summary handling of the paint in the present work create
a sense of drama that is entirely fitting to the narrative. Margaret of
Antioch was a legendry virgin martyr. She refused a proposal of
marriage from the prefect of Antioch and was cruelly tortured and
imprisoned as a result. Satan allegedly appeared to her in the form of
a dragon and devoured her. The cross she held in her hand irritated the
monster’s insides and the dragon burst open allowing her to escape
unharmed, only to be subsequently decapitated. Panofsky notes that
Titian’s decision to depict Saint Margaret and the dragon in an outdoor
setting suggests he was using an apocryphal version of the legend.

"Titian’s
Saint Margaret is conceived with a profound understanding of the
dramatic potential of the scene. She is a triumphant figure whose
body, depicted in dramatic contrapposto, fills the entire
right-hand side of picture plane, almost touching the right-hand and
lower margins. Prof. Paul Joannides has noted Titian's deliberate
comparison with Raphael and Giulio Romano's versions of the same
subject (Giulio's Saint Margaret was in Venice in the
early sixteenth-century, in the collection of Zuananonio Venier,
today housed in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna). Titian's Margaret surpasses
the serenity of Giulio's interpretation, which lacks the intensity of
expression and setting. Titian's saint is painted in a
myriad of colours and her luminous light green tunic with its bright
white sleeves and rose pink veil stands out from the more earthy, brown
based tones of the rest of the canvas. The dragon that occupies the
bottom resister of the canvas is predominantly painted in brown and
blackish hues and the only flashes of colour are the strokes of red and
white delineating his vicious mouth. The implied movement in Saint
Margaret’s twisting body contrasts to the stolidity of the rock face
behind her and she emerges from the picture plane as an impressive
figure, trampling the dragon underfoot and holding her cross aloft.

"The
painting was inspected on 28 September 2012 by Prof. Peter Humfrey
and Dr Nicholas Penny. Both believe it to have been painted as a second
version of the Prado picture and with a significant degree of studio
assistance. Prof. Humfrey saw the painting again in person on 27
October 2017. In his opinion the Saint Margaret is a picture
produced under Titian’s direction in his workshop, with the execution
largely due to the workshop but parts, such as the landscape in the
background, possibly involving the direct involvement of Titian
himself. Prof. Joannides inspected the painting on 26 October
2017; he maintains his view, published in 2004, that it is by Titian
and his studio. The Royal Collection is currently working on an
online reconstruction of the collection of Charles I at Whitehall
Palace, which will include the present work. We are grateful to all
those cited for their comments. In particular we wish to thank Lucy
Whitaker and Niko Munz at the Royal Collection for their help in
compiling this catalogue entry."

The
lot has a modest estimate of $2,000,000 to $3,000,000. It sold for $2,175,000.

Lot
10, "Lucretia," by Lucas Cranach the Elder (1472-1553), oil on
limewood, 23 1/4 by 18 1/2 inches. The sitter's mouth is just
open enough to see the bottom of her top row of teeth, which is a bit
unusual for Cranach.The catalogue
provides the following commentary:
"This is one of the earliest known treatments of the classical subject
of Lucretia by Lucas Cranach the
Elder. Unanimously dated by scholars circa 1510-13,
it was painted during the early years following Cranach’s arrival in
Wittenberg in 1504 to work in the employ of the Electors of Saxony, and
shortly after the conferral in 1508 by Duke Frederick the Wise of the
coat of arms with the winged serpent device that would became the basis
of the artist’s signature. Of all the known depictions of Lucretia by
Cranach and his circle, this can be considered the most sensual and
beautiful and it is a supreme example of the type of erotic historical
painting produced for the artist’s private patrons, ironically right in
the geographic and ideological heart of the Reformation, in the very
court where Cranach’s great friend Martin Luther enjoyed the protection
of the Electors of Saxony.

"The
painting was first published by Friedländer and Rosenberg in 1932, who
identified the picture as an early work by Lucas Cranach the Elder and
proposed a dating of circa 1510-13. A terminus ante quem is
provided by the existence of a copy after Cranach’s original by his
pupil Hans Döring, which is signed with his monogram HD and dated 1514,
and is today in the Wiesbaden Museum. Cranach is known to have begun to
develop his workshop by 1507 and the existence of Döring's copy
attests to the practice of pupils copying the master’s originals,
although the presence of the signature may have been a requisite to
avoid any possible confusion with Cranach’s own or ‘approved’ studio
versions.

"In
1976 the present work was published by Koepplin and Falk, who likewise
dated it circa 1510-13, and at the time believed it to be the
earliest known treatment of the subject of Lucretia by the
Elder Cranach. They tentatively associated the work with a possible
pendant depicting the Old Testament figure Salome, today hanging
in the Museu de Arte Antigua in Lisbon, in which the figure is
similarly depicted, half-length (holding the head of Saint John the
Baptist on a platter), against a black background, also wearing a
choker set with precious stones.

"In
early 2012 another early treatment of Lucretia by Cranach the
Elder appeared at auction in these rooms. Its dating of
around 1509/10 places it as the earliest
of Cranach's treatments of the figure of Lucretia.
Both that painting and the present Lucretia share a
great deal in common in design and handling. Both paintings depict the
female heroine three-quarter length, in a similar pose, wearing a fur
mantel and holding the dagger to her breast; the physiognomy is far
more Italianate and naturalistic than the standard idealised courtly
types that would dominate Cranach’s later treatments of the subject,
and the features of the distinctive plump, rounded faces are rendered
with remarkable detail and precision that suggest the use of real life
models and lend a far greater sense of realism to the scene. The artist
has made however a number of revisions to the earlier design, which
gives the present version a heightened sense of drama and greater
sensuality. Most strikingly, Lucretia is depicted with both breasts and
the lower part of her midriff exposed, whilst her hair has been tied up
and arranged in an elegant plat on her head. The artist has replaced
the richly adorned sleeves in the earlier version with a simple white
shirt that focuses the viewer on the strong vertical of the exposed
body and the drama that is about to unfold. Moreover, Lucretia’s right
hand, holding the dagger, has been turned over and her arm bent to give
greater vigour and emphasis to the imminent thrust of the sharp blade,
thereby heightening further the overall sense of drama.

For
Cranach, the figure of Lucretia appears to have represented an
embodiment of virtue rather than merely an historical figure. The story
is taken from Livy’s Ab Urbe
Condita. Lucretia was raped by Sextus Tarquinius, son of the
last Roman king Tarquinius Superbus. Although her father and husband
swore to avenge her, in order to fully expunge her dishonour, she
committed suicide by stabbing herself. According to legend, the horror
of the act and her extreme sense of honour spurred the aristocracy to
rise up against the monarchy and establish the Roman Republic. She was
therefore considered as an exemplar of the virtuous Roman wife and at
the court in Wittenberg, with its emphasis of intellect and learning,
her conduct was celebrated as one of the antique virtues.

"Cranach’s
fascination with the story of Lucretia is attested by the considerable
number of treatments of the subject that he painted throughout his long
career, with some 35 versions attributed to him or his circle. The
present work appears to have enjoyed particular success and is known
through numerous copies and derivations. In addition to the 1514 copy
by Hans Döring there are workshop versions in the Kunstmuseum, Basel
and the Crocker Art Gallery, Sacramento. The present work however,
along with the earlier known treatment, stand alone as works of
singular beauty and refinement within the artist’s numerous essays on
the subject, and through the use of life-like models possess a sense of
realism that is entirely absent in Cranach’s later treatments from the
1530s and 40s. What is common to all of the great German Renaissance
master’s representations of the theme however is that the veneer of
decency afforded by the historical subject does little to disguise the
deeply erotic overtones of the scenes and it perhaps seems shocking
that such images were deemed acceptable at the height of the
Reformation and in the Saxon Court where Luther and Cranach lived and
enjoyed a close friendship."

The
lot has an estimate of $2,000,000 to $3,000,000. It sold for $2,895,000.

Lot 9
is a good, small portrait by Cranach of Martin Luther, an oil on
beechwood. It measures 15 7/8 by 10 1/2 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Just
over five hundred years ago in 1517 Martin Luther pinned
his Ninety-Five Theses challenging the Catholic Church’s
practice of the sale of indulgences to the doors of the church in
Wittenberg in Germany. By so doing he precipitated a chain of events
that would lead directly to the Protestant Reformation, and thus change
the political and religious landscape of Europe forever. This is the
first known painted portrait of the great reformer and shows him during
the most important (and dangerous) eighteen months of his life. It was
painted in Wittenberg around 1520, shortly before his excommunication
by the Pope and his summons by the Emperor Charles V to defend his
actions at the Diet of Worms in 1521. This panel is of very
considerable importance in its own right, for it is also the first
painted portrait of Luther by his lifelong friend Lucas Cranach, one of
the greatest artists of the German Renaissance. No doubt because of
this, it has an immediacy and sympathy for character which
distinguishes it from the many portraits of his friend that Cranach
would later paint. Unshaven but steadfast, we can readily sense here
the fixity of purpose and resolute belief in his own principles that
Luther would display in the months ahead.

"Luther
is shown by Cranach in three-quarter profile, the black of his robes
and hat set against a deep olive green background. The costume in which
he is depicted combines the habit of a monk of the closed Order of
Augustinian Friars, which he had joined in Erfurt in July 1505, with
the doctoral hat which marked his being made Doctor of Theology at
Wittenberg University in 1512. Cranach had very recently showed Luther
separately in both guises, the former in front of a recess in an
engraving of 1520,1 and the latter in an engraved profile portrait
of 1521. Another engraved portrait, closely related to the first of
these and showing the thirty-seven year old Luther in head and
shoulders format, again dressed as an Augustinian monk but without the
niche, also dates from 1520. The date of 1517 which appears in the
upper left corner of the present painted panel is a later addition and
thus unreliable, and in any case would not fit with what we know of
Cranach’s style at that date. Unfortunately the traces of the original
date which accompanied Cranach’s serpent device beside the sitter’s
shoulder are now too indistinct to shed any further light, but even
without a clear date, the close relationship between the three
engravings and the painted portrait, together with Luther’s relatively
youthful features, all clearly suggest that they were executed within a
very short time of each other.

"Despite
this short time period, in these early likenesses we can clearly sense
a development in Cranach’s depiction of Luther’s features. The painting
is closest to the engraved portrait in a recess in terms of its general
design, but the features are more rounded and full, the hair longer and
the eyebrows more closely defined, with the striking gaunt ascetism and
the piercing gaze of the engraving replaced by a more confident
demeanour. The features in the painting are in turn leaner and less
rounded than those apparent in the engraved profile portrait of 1521,
and this suggests it was painted before it. As Koepplin was first to
observe, it is more than likely that all of these early likenesses
evolved from an original drawing from the life. While any such drawing
has since been lost, some idea of its appearance may be gauged from the
elaborate and detailed under-drawing that appears on this panel. This
is very reminiscent of a life study in its own right and may well have
been taken during a portrait sitting. Certainly Cranach does not flinch
from a highly objective portrayal of his friend, whose stubble is
carefully realised in some detail. As Werner Schade has remarked, ‘In
the earliest of the surviving paintings we feel the rawness of the
early Luther’.

"A
dating for this panel to around 1520 has generally been agreed by
scholars. Schade has suggested a date of 1520, while the compilers of
the London exhibition catalogue of 2007 propound a similar or slightly
earlier dating around 1519–1520. Earlier, at the time of the Basel
exhibition in 1974, Koepplin remarked that on purely stylistic grounds
a date as late as 1524 – at which point Luther gave up his Augustinian
habit – was technically feasible, but he also preferred a date around
1520 or a little later. The present portrait would therefore pre-date
Cranach’s next likeness of Luther, the portrait of the reformer in the
disguise of Junker Jorg, painted during Luther’s years of refuge in
late 1521 or early 1522. As Koepplin observes, the purely bust-length
format, omitting the hands, was relatively rare in Cranach’s œuvre,
repeated at this date only by the Portrait of the Margrave Kasimir
of Brandenburg-Ansbach of 1522 now in Vienna, Kunsthistorisches
Museum, and seemingly not taken up again with other sitters until his Portrait
of Sigmunt Kingsfelt from the end of the decade now at Compton
Verney. By the latter date, however, Cranach had re-visited this bust
length pattern for a later portrait type of Luther paired with his wife
Katharina von Bora, in which the sitters head is turned more toward the
viewer; good examples, dating from 1528, are in the Schlossmuseum in
Weimar. By contrast with Cranach’s later portraits of Luther, however,
this first painted likeness was not engraved nor much repeated,
suggesting a more private or personal commission. An early version of
this portrait, unsigned and undated, is preserved in the Lutherhaus in
Wittenberg and a later workshop copy was sold in these rooms 7 July
1993, lot 245.

"It
is quite conceivable that the date of 1517 that appears on this panel
was added simply because it is the most famous date in Luther’s life,
the year when he nailed his Theses to the church doors in
Wittenberg, a date now generally declared to represent the start of the
Protestant Reformation. Even if this date is unreliable, there
can be no doubt that this portrait was painted during the most
important moments of Luther’s life. On the 31 October 1517, Luther had
sent his Ninety-five Theses in a letter to Albert of
Brandenburg, Archbishop of Mainz (see lot 27 in this sale). The same
day he affixed them to the doors of All Saints Church (and other
churches in the city) in accordance with university custom, for by this
time Luther was Professor of Moral Theology at the University of
Wittenberg. The Ninety-five Theses were written in protest
against the contemporary practice of the Church for selling
indulgences, by which the faithful might purchase a temporal remission
of sin and thus avoid time in purgatory for their souls. More recently,
that same year Pope Leo X had sanctioned indulgences to be sold to
raise money for the construction of St Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Luther
would also have been especially aware of those then being sold by
Albrecht of Brandenburg in order to pay for his elevation to the
Archbishopric, not to mention his encouragement of the local practice,
whereby an indulgence might be ‘earned’ by ‘veneration’ of the
large collection of relics in All Saints Church itself. Luther had
already preached several times on the subject of indulgences, advancing
the case that true repentance of the individual outweighed any purchase
of an indulgence. Nevertheless even he must have been surprised
at the speed with which his theses were printed and distributed
throughout Germany, and the extraordinary swell of popular support that
followed.

"Over
the next two years, the dangers that Luther’s preaching represented to
the authority of established Church became clear. Albrecht of
Brandenburg did not reply to his letter but immediately passed it on to
his superiors in Rome on suspicion of possible heresy. The Dominican
preacher and Inquisitor Johann Tetzel, whose own notorious sales of
indulgences were carried out under the authority of the archbishop,
called for Luther to be burnt at the stake. Luther was summoned by the
authority of the Pope to defend himself against charges of heresy at
Augsburg in October 1518 before the papal legate Cardinal Cajetan.
Luther in turn sought the protection of the Elector Frederick the Wise.
At the meeting, Luther refused to recant and appealed directly to the
Pope. A further debate in 1519 with the theologian Johann Eck
dangerously compared Luther to the heretic Jan Hus. At this point the
Emperor Charles V (who needed the Elector Frederick’s support)
intervened and persuaded the Pope to summon Luther to a further hearing
at the next Imperial Diet. The Pope agreed but in June 1520 he issued
his Papal Bull Exsurge Domini rejecting Luther’s Theses and
threatening him with excommunication. Luther publicly set fire to the
bull and decretals at Wittenberg on 10 December that same year. The
inevitable followed and Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo on 3
January 1521.

"Given
the situation in which Luther found himself at this date, Cranach’s
portrait still exudes a remarkable air of quiet confidence. Although
his actions on All Saints Day were only ever intended to provoke an
academic debate, not a popular revolution, by this date Luther can
hardly have been unaware of the popularity of his views, and of the
religious storm to which they were bound to lead him. He was duly
summoned by the Emperor Charles V to attend the Imperial Diet of Worms,
held in his presence between 28 January and 26 May 1521, and ordered
again and for the last time to repudiate his Theses. Luther chose
to attend under guarantee of safe conduct, but once at Worms, he
refused to withdraw his attacks on the abuses of the Church. ‘If I
recant these’, he stated, ‘then I would be doing nothing but
strengthening the tyranny’. On the 26 May 1521, the Emperor pronounced
the Edict of Worms, banning reading or possession of Luther’s writings
and commanding him ‘to be apprehended and punished as a notorious
heretic’.

Luther’s
life was now in grave danger, and without waiting to hear his fate, he
fled the city. During his return to Wittenberg, he was helped to
‘disappear’ in a faked highway robbery arranged by the Elector
Frederick the Wise, and hidden in seclusion at Wartburg castle, where
he began his translation of the New Testament into German. Cranach did
not abandon his friend or his cause, and indeed this portrait is
witness to the start of long and enduring relationship between the two
men. They became close friends and godparents to each other’s children.
Cranach painted Luther again perhaps as early as December 1521, showing
him in the guise of the ‘Junker Jorg’ given to him by the Elector at
this time to conceal his identity and used later to deny his rumoured
death. Although now fully bearded in the court fashion, the stress and
defiance on Luther’s face seems clear. Luther finally returned to
Wittenberg in March 1522 and his translation of the New Testament
appeared in print in September of the same year. It is clear that he
and his supporters understood the importance of Cranach’s painted and
printed images of the reformer, and a successful woodcut appeared that
same year based on the new portrait.12 Thereafter Cranach painted
Martin Luther both in his own right, and then paired with his wife and
then his friend and fellow reformer Lucas Melanchthon. So great was the
popular demand for these portraits that from the 1530s onwards the
Cranach workshop evolved a highly efficient studio practice in order to
accommodate the demand. It might be argued that Cranach never quite
regained the intensity so evident in this portrait, and indeed his
later images of the reformer were inevitably diluted by the sheer
weight of repetitions. Cranach and Luther also worked closely together
on numerous propaganda pieces against the Church, and Cranach was to
devise a series of paintings depicting representations of emerging
Protestant themes – Christ summoning the children, for example, or
Christ and the woman taken in adultery – which slowly evolved into a
pictorial programme of images for the Reformation movement. Cranach did
not, however, work exclusively for the Protestant cause, and even
numbered Cardinal Albrecht of Brandenburg among his Catholic patrons.

"It
is hard for us today to fully comprehend the courage that Luther showed
at Worms in the full knowledge of the dire penalties – including
possible death by burning at the stake – that would face him. His
powerful testimony of faith at the Diet made a deep impression on all
those who heard it, most notably George ‘The Pious’, Margave of
Brandenburg-Ansbach (1484–1543), who later corresponded with and then
met Luther, and was one of the first important nobles to go over to the
new Protestant faith. Ultimately, however, the Edict of Worms was never
really enforced in Germany because of the protection of many German
princes on the one hand (who hoped that by this means the political
power of the Papacy would be lessened), and on the other by Luther’s
undeniably widespread support among the populace as a whole. Luther
himself remained in Saxony, where the Elector Frederick had obtained an
exemption from the Edict of Worms. By now the debate about indulgences
had developed into altogether more serious issues. On a theological
level, Luther had successfully challenged the absolute authority of the
Pope himself. He had in addition denounced all doctrine and dogma of
the church that was not to be found in scripture as invalid. Most
importantly of all, perhaps, he had maintained that Salvation was to be
obtained by faith alone (‘sola fide’), without references to alms,
penance or the Church’s sacraments. What was initially a genuine effort
to reform the Catholic faith eventually transformed into a major schism
within Christianity itself."

The
lot has a modest estimate of $800,000 to $1,200,000. It sold for $2,295,000.

Lot 34, "Portrait
of a Young man, bust length, in a red cap," by Florentine artist, close
to Sandro Botticelli, circa 1480-85

Lot
13 is a Botticelliesque "Portrait of a Young Man, bust length, in a Red
Cap," tempera on panel, 16 3/4 by 10 1/4 inches, circa 1480-85.
The lot has considerable literature including references by Berenson,
Venturi and Fahy. The catalogue reproduces an infrared picture of the
painting that shows the top of a hand in the left bottom corner.
It has an estimate of $600,000 to $800,000. It was passed.

As
the recent "Unfinished" exhibition at the Met Breuer demonstrated,
there is nothing more enticing than a beautiful incomplete painting
that brings great dignity to the concept of "sketch." One such
work is Lot 67, "Portrait of Mrs. Joseph Inchbald," an oil and black
chalk on canvas by Sir Thomas Lawrence. It measures 27 by 25
inches. It was included in the Lawrence show in 1961 at the Royal
Academy in London, the Yale Center for British Art and the Kimbell Art
Museum in Fort Worth and in the 1993 Lawrence exhibition at the
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Elizabeth
Simpson Inchbald, the daughter of a Suffolk farmer, left home at an
early age determined to make a career on the stage. She married the
actor Joseph Inchbald (1735-1779), playing Cordelia to his Lear in her
debut in 1772 in Bristol. In the ensuing years, she performed in
numerous roles, not only in Shakespearian drama, but in 17th century
comedies and tragedies as well as contemporary plays, appearing in
London and Dublin. Though she had numerous admirers, her acting
was never critically acclaimed and she began to devote her energy into
writing both plays and fiction. In 1789, she retired from the
stage to write full time, achieving considerable success. Her
work for the stage included comedies, sentimental dramas and farces,
some of which were original and others of which were adaptations of
French and German plays. Inchbald is best known today for her
novel A Simple Story (1791), and to readers of Jane Austen’s Mansfield
Park in which her play, Lover’s Vows (1798) is the drama
enacted by some of the characters in a private theatrical and deemed
rather unsuitable, as it follows the story of a “fallen woman” and her
illegitimate son.

"Inchbald
is thought to have met Lawrence through the actress Sarah Siddons with
whom she had a close friendship. This portrait of circa 1796,
left unfinished, provides us with insight into Lawrence’s working
method when beginning a portrait. According to his early
biographer, Allan Cunningham, “His constant practice was to begin by
making a drawing of the head full size on canvass; carefully tracing
dimensions and expression. This took up one day.” At the
next sitting, Lawrence would begin to paint the head. In this
portrait of Mrs. Inchbald, we see exactly this method with the head
having been almost fully worked up while her torso is delineated by
black chalk drawn directly on the canvas. Though never completed,
Lawrence has already captured the beauty and keen intelligence of his
sitter."

The
lot has an estimate of $150,000 to $200,000. It sold for $399,000.

Lot 32, "The
Crucifixion with the Virgin, and Saints Mary Magdalene, John the
Evangelist and a Francescan female saint," by Pietro Lorenzetti and
workshop, tempera on panel, gold ground, 16 1/8 by 10 1/4 inches

Lot 32
is a small and very handsome tempera on panel with gold ground by
Pietro Lorenzetti (1276-1348) and workshop of "The Crucifixion and the
Virgin and Saints Mary Magdalene, John the Evangelist and a Francescan
female saint. It measures 16 1/8 by 10 1/4 inches.

Lot 3 is a very
impressive and large "Madonna and Child enthroned with music-making
angels" by Agnolo Gaddi (active 1369-1390). It measures 52 by 32
inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"This
majestic Madonna and Child was first associated with Agnolo
Gaddi by Kronfeld in 1931. This attribution has most recently and
convincingly been argued by Gaudenz Freuler in his publication
accompanying the 1991 exhibition at the Fonazione Thyssen-Bomemisza, in
Lugano. Agnolo was the son of Taddeo Gaddi, a pupil of Giotto, and one
of the most influential and inventive artists of Trecento Florence.
Agnolo and his brother Giovanni were, through their father, heirs to
the Giottesque tradition and to a prosperous family enterprise, which
Agnolo directed with enormous success up to the turn of the 15th
century.

"When
this Madonna and Child was published by Boskovits in 1968 he
noted that an attribution to Agnolo is supported by the rich floral and
animal ornamentation of the Virgin’s gown, whose motifs of leaping
rabbits and foliage are reproduced exactly in other pictures by the
artist, for example in the background of the Madonna from the
Contini Bonacossi Collection and now in the Uffizi, Florence. When
Boskovits published this panel for a second time in 1975, he proposed
that it may have been the central panel of a polyptych, and that it
might well have been flanked by the two pairs of saints that are
currently framed as one altarpiece with the aforementioned Contini
Bonacossi Madonna (see fig.1). Boskovits proposed a dating of
the polyptych to the artist’s youthful period around the years 1375-80.

"The
theory placing the present panel with the Contini Bonacossi saints has
been supported most recently by Gaudenz Freuler. Like Berenson,
however,3 Freuler proposed a later dating of the altarpiece to the
1390s during which period Gaddi’s paintings display an increased
linearity, a more substantial volume to his figures, an increased
attention to the detailed handling of the gold elements and their
decoration, all balanced with a harmonious palette of pastel
tones.4 These qualities of his later works were the distinctive
traits that paved the way for the next generation of Florentine artists
such as Starnina (to whom the present panel was erroneously attributed
by Quintavalle in 1939, see Literature) and Lorenzo Monaco.
Freuler also writes of the possible connection between
this Madonna and Child and the accompanying Contini Bonacossi
saints, and an altarpiece for the Church of San Miniato al Monte in
Florence, for which Agnolo received payment during the last years of
this activity (1394-96). Due to the inclusion of the figure of Saint
Benedict in the Contini Bonacossi panels, it has been thought that this
may be the altarpiece created for the Benedictine Church of San
Miniato. As Freuler notes, this must remain speculative as there are
fragments of another altarpiece by Agnolo preserved at San Miniato,
which have also been associated with the documents noting the payments
to the artist in the mid-1390s."

The lot has a modest estimate of $400,000 to $600,000. It sold for $1,455,000.

Lot 8, "The Virgin and
Child with Saint Anne," by Hans Holbein the Elder, oil on panel, 17 1/4
by 13 5/8 inches

Lot
8 is a charming small oil on panel by Hans Holbein The Elder
(1465-1524) of "The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne." It
measures 17 1/4 by 13 5/8 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"This small
devotional panel by Hans Holbein the Elder depicts the very tender
scene of The Virgin and Child with St. Anne, a subject that had
been popular in Germany from the 14th century onwards. Long
known to art historians and fully accepted as an autograph work, it was
never widely exhibited and so was previously seen only by a small
circle of specialists. Now that it has returned to the market, we
can appreciate for ourselves its remarkable energy and charm.

"During
his lifetime Holbein was one the leading painters in south Germany
with a large studio at his disposal. Today, however, we
recognize his even greater historical significance because he was a
bridge between the lingering Gothic elements of the 15th century, seen
in works of great northern masters such as Rogier van der Weyden,
and the full blown Renaissance style, as embodied in the paintings
of his son, Hans Holbein the Younger. Holbein’s father was a
tanner, but his mother, Anna Mair, was related to leading painters and
sculptors in and around Augsburg, who provided an important influence
for him in his formative years. In this, one of his earliest
extant works, we can see his connection to an older generation of
artists as well as his own remarkable talent and
inventiveness. The Christ Child is seated between the Virgin and
St. Anne. He seems quite independent although perhaps somewhat
precariously balanced as he reaches for the Virgin’s prayer book with
his right hand. On his other side, St. Anne grasps him loosely by
his left wrist as she leans forward to offer him an apple. The
Virgin, Christ and St. Anne are all seated on an elaborate golden
throne; its base is a barbed quatrefoil, a common motif in Gothic
architectural design, which is strewn with roses. Two flying
angels hold up a cloth behind the Infant while above his head
flutters the Dove of the Holy Spirit. The upper corners of
the composition are closed off by gilded tracery in a pattern of
twining branches.

"Several
commentators have noted the influence of the sculptor Nicolaus
Gerhaert, on Holbein’s overall conception of the subject, probably
known to him through a lost drawing or sculptural group.
Certainly in Gerhaert’s Virgin and Child with St. Anne in the
Deutsches Museum, Berlin, we see a similar sense of freedom in the
depiction of the Child, who leans away from the Virgin to reach St.
Anne, as well as that same element of instability, as if in his
enthusiasm, he might well topple over. The figures, too, with
their thin, elegant bodies, large heads, and the sharp, well-defined
folds of the drapery look back to the late Gothic style that
characterizes Gerhaert’s sculpture."

The
lot has an estimate of $400,000 to $600,000. It sold for $615,000.

Lot 19, "The
Cruxification with Mary Magdalene kneeling at the Cross," by Alessandro
Allori, oil on lapis-lazuli, 6 5/8 by 5 1/4 inches

Lot 19 is an exquisite small oil
painting on lapis-lazuli by Alessandro Allori (1535-1607) that is
entitled "The Crucifixation with Mary Magdalene Kneeling at the
Cross." It measures 6 5/8 by 5 1/4 inches. It was commissioned by
Ferdinando de' Medici in 1602.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Alessandro Allori was one of the most sought after painters in
Florence in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. After the
death of his father, when he was five, Allori was adopted by the
painter Agnolo Bronzino, in whose workshop he trained. Like his
mentor, he enjoyed the patronage of the Medici, the ruling family of
Florence, and other elite citizens of the city.
This jewel-like work, painted directly onto lapis-lazuli, was painted
in 1602 for Ferdinando I de’ Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany
(1549-1609). Ferdinando was made a cardinal at age fourteen,
however he was never ordained. During his years in Rome he began
acquiring works of art and built Villa Medici, which would eventually
become the home of the French Academy in Rome. Upon the death of
his older brother Francesco I, in 1587, he returned to Florence,
renouncing his position as cardinal and marrying. He continued
his patronage of the arts, favoring religious commissions and
devotional subjects such as the present painting.

"Despite its small size, the composition of this painting is
exquisitely detailed. The distraught figure of Mary Magdalen kneels at
the foot of the cross, gazing up at the crucified Christ. At
left, a skeleton, also looking up at Christ, holds a scroll with the
words Lamorte Ch’ei Sostene Perchi
Viva, a reminder to the viewer of Christ’s sacrifice for
mankind. At right can be seen the Resurrected Christ leading the
Old Testament prophets and patriarchs out of Limbo, with the flames of
hell in the background. The beautiful blue of the lapis stone is
deliberately left unpainted to serve as the background sky.

"This painting is recorded in the inventory of the Guardaroba Medicea
on 26 October 1602, when a payment was made for two paintings: “Payment
of 68 scudi for a copper painting with the ‘Madonna with her little
son’ and for an oval in lapis lazuli with a ‘Crucifixion.’ The latter
picture is also listed in the inventory of the Guardaroba Medicea for
the years 1625-1629 where it is described as hanging in the private
apartments of Maria Maddalena of Austria, on the ground floor of the
Villa at Poggio Imperiale, along with another small painting, also on
lapis, by Cigoli: 'Two small oval lapis-lazuli paintings, one
depicting Christ in the Garden of Olives, by Cigoli, and the other
illustrating Christ on the cross with Mary Magdalen at his feet, with
the figure of death and other small figures, in the hand of Alessandro
Allori, called Bronzino, framed in ebony inset with ivory.' This
Crucifixion is further recorded in the 1654-6 inventory as hanging in
the ground floor Galleria of the Villa at Poggio Imperiale, however it
is not listed in the later inventories of the Guardaroba Medicea.
The painting may have been dispersed when large portions of the
collection were taken or sold at auction following the death of the
last Grand Duke of Tuscany, Gian Gastone de’ Medici in 1737."

Detail of Lot 19

It
has an estimate of $80,000 to
$120,000. It sold for $735,000.

Lot 6,
"Virgin and Child," by Flemish School, second half of the 15th Century,
oil on panel, 12 3/8 by 7 5/8 inches

Lot
6 is a very nice, small oil on panel of the "Virgin and Child" by
Flemish School in the second half of the 15th Century. It
measures 12 3/8 by 7 5/8 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Rendered with remarkable skill and finesse, this small panel is the
work of an accomplished artist active in the Low Countries in the
second half of the 15th century. The Virgin, with her high
forehead, flowing gold hair, and jewel trimmed robes of red and green
reaches towards her bare breast with her right hand and lovingly
supports the Christ Child in her lap with her left. Draped in a
soft white garment, he grasps an ornate prayer book in his hands, while
a cross, a symbol of his Passion and held aloft by an angel with
multi-colored wings, rests against his shoulder.

"Such
devotional half-length depictions of the Virgin and Child are thought
to have been introduced into the Netherlands around 1450 by Rogier van
der Weyden, who established an artistic tradition that influenced
generations of artists to follow him, among the most prominent being
Petrus Christus and Dieric Bouts. Indeed, the tender design of
the present work seems to derive from a Rogierian source, one that has
perhaps now been lost. The elongated face of the Virgin, the
ornately trimmed veil, and the sinuous Christ holding a precious prayer
book can be compared to those found in Rogier van der Weyden’s Virgin
and Child in Half Length of circa 1460-64 in the
Huntington Art Collections in San Marino, California. A similar
motif of the Madonna Lactans appears in another half-length
depiction of the Virgin and Child given to the Workshop of Rogier van
der Weyden in the Art Institute of Chicago. Additionally, the theme of
the child clasping the cross is repeated in a few examples recorded by
Max Friedländer as relating to this artist, including one painting
given to a Follower of Rogier van der Weyden in the Philadelphia Museum
of Art. The success of Rogier's designs and the many
iterations they inspired among artists from the second half of the
sixteenth century onward bears witness to the impact and enduring
appeal of these new types of half-length devotional images dedicated to
the Virgin and her Son, and the present panel is an excellent example
of the dissemination of his pictorial tradition.

That
all of the figures in the present work face in one direction towards
the right suggest that they very likely once served as the left wing of
a small devotional diptych."

"Although
the figures within this painting are very well preserved, the punched
gilding of the background was perhaps added at a later date."

The
lot has an estimate of $250,000 to $350,000. It sold for $495,000.

Lot 13,
"The Flight of Lot," is a good oil on canvas by Nicolaes Maes
(1634-1693). It measures 42 1/2 by 37 1/2 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"This beautiful and
moving depiction of The Flight of Lot is a rare biblical subject by
Nicolaes Maes, who is best known for his genre paintings and portraits.
Early in his career, shortly after leaving Rembrandt’s studio and
beginning to paint as an independent master, he produced a number of
religious themed works, such as Abraham Dismissing Hagar and Ismael of
1653, his earliest dated work (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York...).

"The story of
Lot, nephew of Abraham, and his flight from the city of Sodom is told
in Genesis (19: 1-28). Two angels, to whom Lot had given hospitality
for the night, warned him that God was about to destroy the cities of
Sodom and Gomorrah for their sinfulness, and urged him to flee with his
wife and two daughters. The angels warned them not to look behind
them as they left “lest they be consumed.” Lot’s wife did
not heed their advice and, upon looking back, was turned into a pillar
of salt. This painting depicts the moment before this happens, as
the angels are seen literally pushing the family along as one daughter
frantically gathers food and valuables in a basket, while the other has
bundled other belongings in a rug which she carries on her head.
Lot’s wife weeps and pulls away from him as he tries to persuade her to
come with them. Maes touchingly captures the anguish and
confusion of the moment."This painting
is likely the picture sold in the 1811 sale...as by Ferdinand Bol,
another artist in Rembandt’s circle. It seems to have remained under
that name as it appeared as such in the 1914 Griscom collection sale in
New York...., where it was purchased by the Vanderlip family.
Franklin Robinson, in 1977...first linked the painting to Maes when he
related it to a drawing of the same subject, then ascribed to Maes (but
now given to Justus de Gelder, Maes’s stepson) in the Abrams
collection. In his important publications on the Rembrandt
School, Werner Sumowski...published The
Flight of Lot as a work by Nicolas Maes and dated it to circa
1675-80, relating it stylistically to another work from this period, The Sick Woman, formerly in the
Corcoran Gallery of Art , Washington, D.C., and now in the National
Gallery of Art. León Krempel, in his monograph on Maes...and
based on an old black and white photograph, questioned the attribution
to Maes, though compared the curly-haired angels and the painterly
treatment of the draperies to Maes’s portrait style of circa
1679-86. However, having recently seen good images of the
painting, Krempel has stated that he is inclined to accept The Flight of Lot as a work by
Maes, pending further research. We are also grateful to Volker
Manuth who has endorsed the attribution of this painting to Maes, on
the basis of photographs."

Detail
of Lot 19

The lot has a modest estimate of
$80,000 to $120,000. It sold for
$150,000.

Lot 54, "Venice, the
churches of the Redentore and San Giacomo; Venice, the prisons and the
Bridge of Sighs, Looking Northeast from the Balcony," by Giovanni
Antonio Canal, called Canaletto, a pair, oils on canvas, 18 3/4 by 30
1/3 inches each

Lot 54
consists of a pair of oils on canvas by Giovanni Antono Canal called
Canaletto (1697-1768). Each measures 18 3/4 bny 30 1/4
inches. One is entitled "Venice, the churches of the Redentore
and San Giacomo" and the other is entitled "Venice,
the prisons and the Bridge of Sighs, Looking Northeast from the
Balcony."

The catalogue provides the
following commentary;

"Remarkably preserved and in nearly pristine condition,
this impressive pair of canvases demonstrates Canaletto’s inimitable
success in capturing the imposing elegance of the architecture that
defined 18th-century Venice. Most likely completed in England in
the late 1740s and rendered with the artist’s customary attention to
detail, the pair offers waterfront views of two of the most
recognizable façades in La Serenissima: the Church of the
Redentore and the Prisons of San Marco. Using a bright and
dramatic light, Canaletto illuminates the remarkable grandeur of each
building, highlighting their individually intricate yet balanced
designs. Set beneath blue skies, bathed with a crisp atmosphere,
and animated with fashionable figures, as well as gondolas and sandalos
that glide gently atop the waters of the foregrounds, this pair can be
ranked among Canaletto’s most admired masterpieces and are enduring
examples of why he has long remained the undisputed leader of the genre
of Venetian view painting.

"Built
of Istrian Stone, the church of the Redentore, or officially the Chiesa
del Santissimo Redentore, is arguably Andrea Palladio's (1508-1580)
masterpiece and represents the apex of his refined architectural ideas.
It was constructed on the island of the Giudecca in the years
1577-1592 and was commissioned by the Venetian Senate to give thanks to
God for the deliverance of the city from the major plague of 1575-1576,
which had decimated around one quarter of the city's population and had
claimed the lives of many of the city's luminaries, including that of
Titian. The Senators vowed to visit the church annually and to this day
theFesta del
Redentoreis celebrated: each year on the third
Sunday of July a temporary causeway made from barges is erected across
the Giudecca for people to attend Mass. In the Redentore, Palladio
combined the three distinct sections of the church into one harmonious
whole, all held together by a horizontal cornice. The Redentore
in the present pair is seen slightly left of center from the Canale di
Giudecca and is flanked at right by the campanile of the Church of San
Giacomo, which was demolished in the 19th century, in front of which
appears the stern of a large, moored ship.

"The
public prisons of San Marco, also known as the Palazzo delle Prigioni,
are among the most prominent buildings on the Venetian Molo.
Around 1580, after a fire had destroyed the original prisons in
the Doge’s Palace, Antonio del Ponte, who would later complete the
Rialto Bridge in 1588-1590, was chosen to oversee their reconstruction
and worked from the original designs of Antonio Palladio’s
contemporary, Giovanni Antonio Rusconi. Del Ponte’s nephew,
Antonio Contino, helped oversee the last years of construction and also
built the Bridge of Sighs, which connected the prison to the Doge’s
Palace, both of which are visible in the present pair. The prisons
included quarters for the nocturnal security police, a wing for women,
cells for victims of the Inquisition, an infirmary and a chapel.
Completed in 1597 just before Dal Ponte’s death, the prisons were
among the earliest purpose-built prisons and remained in use for over
three hundred years, until they officially closed in 1919.

"By
the late 1720s and early 1730s, Canaletto had established himself as
the foremost provider of Venetianveduteto
international tourists, many of whom visited the city on their Grand
Tours. His most avid collectors, though, were the British, who
steadily commissioned works from him throughout his career, usually
through Consul Joseph Smith, who acted as agent. Smith
was undoubtedly the catalyst to Canaletto’s rapid rise to fame and was
instrumental in securing the largest commission of the artist’s young
career: a series of twenty-four canvases (two of large format and
twenty two of small format) for the 4th Duke of Bedford incirca1733-1736,
all of which hang today in Woburn Abbey and constitute one of
Canaletto’s finest achievements as painter and topographer. This
series includes Canaletto’s earliest iteration of the view of the
church of the Redentore with the Church of San Giacomo.1 The
principal differences that distinguish the view in the present pair
from the same view at Woburn Abbey can be found in the horizon
line, the location of the spire at San Giacomo, and the placement of
the large moored ship in the foreground. In moving the stern of
the ship to the right of the painting in the present view, Canaletto
seemingly creates a more balanced composition.

"Although
he did not travel frequently throughout his career, Canaletto moved to
London in May of 1746, having already established his reputation among
the British clientele. He may have moved as a result, in part, of
the War of Austrian Succession in 1740, which discouraged English
visitors from undertaking Grand Tours, thereby significantly reducing a
large portion of his client base. While here, Canaletto’s output
did include views of the English countryside and of London, but at the
same time, he was steadily producing views of Venice to satisfy the
insatiable demand for such works among British collectors. He found
considerable success in England, and, except for an eight-month return
to Venice in 1750-1751, he remained there for nine years.

"The
present pair of paintings belongs to a group of six works by the artist
that are similar in size to the small-format canvases in the celebrated
series at Woburn Abbey. The group includes two other pairs, each
of which is anchored by an analogous view of the Churches of the
Redentore and San Giacomo, one in which the central axis has been moved
slightly right and one in which Canaletto populates the scene with a
slightly different staffage and vessels.
Unlike the present pair, which includes a secular view of the prison,
the pendants of the other pairs are both views of the Church of San
Giorgio Maggiore from the Bacino di San Marco.
While the other pairs were separated during their lifetime, and today
can be found in separate collections, the present pair has remained
together since they were possibly acquired by Sir Richard Neave
(1731-1814), in whose family they possibly remained until the late 19th
century.

"That
this group of works is uniform in subject and style suggests that all
were likely completed around the same moment. Over the past few
decades, however, very different datings have been proffered.
Corboz proposed an early date of 1731-1746, Links suggested a
date of around 1754-1760 after Canaletto returned to Venice from
England, and Puppi believed that a completion date of around 1746, just
before the artist’s departure for England, was appropriate.Most
recently, however, Charles Beddington has suggested that the group as a
whole probably dates to the late 1740s, during Canaletto’s stay in
England, for the use of grey grounds and lighter tonality, as opposed
to the Venetian russet grounds, as well as the delicate and translucent
handling is consistent with this period of production for the artist.

"It
is thought that Canaletto likely brought various drawings of his native
city with him to England, such as his pen and brown ink capriccio
drawing of the church of the Redentore, dated 1742, now at The Harvard
Art Museums, Cambridge. As Constable rightly noted, the vantage
point and distinct lighting found in this drawing can be closely
compared to that of the present view of the Church of the Redentore.
Although the setting of this drawing is fictional, the façade and
architecture of the church is captured with the utmost detail, and such
a work would have been an invaluable reference for the artist while
working abroad, especially since his views of the church of the
Redentore with the church of San Giacomo proved to be one of his most
sought after and successful compositions. This comes as no surprise, as
the view would have appealed to numerous clients in England, for it is
here that the most devout admirers of Palladian architecture could be
found. In addition to the version at Woburn Abbey along with the
present version and its related pairs, further examples of this
view of slightly larger dimensions include one formerly in the
collection of Lady Cromwell, now in the Manchester City Art Gallery,and another formerly in the collection of Lord and Lady
Forte, offered in these rooms on 26 January 2012, lot 58.

"On
the other hand, the present view of the Prisons of San Marco is a
unique composition for the artist of which no other version is known.
This famed landmark only appears elsewhere in an autograph
capriccio which once formed part of a series of thirteen overdoor
canvases that decorated the Palazzo Mangilli-Valmarana, a house on the
Grand Canal belonging to Canaletto’s great patron, Joseph Smith, and
that sold in these rooms on 29 January 2009, lot 89. In this
imaginary setting of this capriccio, the prisons are transposed to the
Venetian mainland and set as a wing to a villa in a Piazza with a coach
and various townsfolk. Because of the unusual setting, the
identification of the building in the work long went unrecognized,
first listed by Constable as that of theVilla Pisani, Stra(?), but later
identified by Mr. Richard Zimmerman as the Prisons of San Marco.

"The Neave
Family of Dagnam Park Essex owned a number of important works by
Antonio Canaletto (and his school) from various moments in his career.
Although Constable only notes that “the group of paintings belonging to
Sir Arundell Neave…were acquired by his forebears in the early
nineteenth century,” according to the Neave family they were acquired
by Sir Richard Neave (1731-1814), and this seems almost certainly the
case. Neave was not only the founder of the family fortunes, but
also a successful merchant and director of the Bank of England, and it
seems very likely that he would have met Canaletto in England, where he
would have commissioned works from the artist and ordered more from him
after he returned home to Venice. The works in the collection that were
likely painted in England may include the present pair, a Venetian
Capriccio, and three views of Rome. Two other pairs of views in
the collection date to the period after Canaletto left England and
returned to Venice. Sir Richard Neave was also almost
certainly a patron of other 18thcentury
artists, including Francesco Zuccarelli and Thomas Gainsborough, who in
the 1760s painted a full length double portrait of Sir Richard Neave
and his wife, in which he is depicted as a connoisseur of art, showing
a drawing to his wife. After having possibly been in the Neave
Family, this pair of paintings then passed briefly into the famed
collection of G.A.F. Cavendish Bentinck, who collected paintings from
the most illustrious Venetian artists, such as Tintoretto, Veronese,
Giambattista Tiepolo, Guardi, and Canaletto."

The lot has an
estimate of $3,000,000 to $4,000,000. It sold for $4,179,500.

Lot 73
is a fine oil on canvas by Hubert Robert (1733-1808) of "Figures on
horseback departing a ruined, vaulted building with colonnades."
It measures 28 1/8 by 34 1/4 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Hubert
Robert was the pre-eminent French landscape painter...of the late
18th century, training for over a decade in Rome before establishing
himself at the center of the Parisian art world upon his return to
the city in 1765. During these early years, Robert developed what
would be a life-long fascination with architecture and his many
depictions of ruins earned him the sobriquet 'Robert des Ruines.'
By the time the artist returned to Paris, he was already successful and
well-known. He was accepted as a member of the Academy in 1766
and, in 1778, was appointed designer of the King’s gardens and given
lodgings in the Louvre. He exhibited regularly at the Salons
until 1797 and completed countless commissions for the nobility,
aristocracy and foreign dignitaries throughout his career.
He was renowned for his imaginary landscapes
featuring ancient ruins and beautiful gardens, often
incorporating both known and fantastical architectural elements in his
compositions.

"The present painting includes many of the elements for which
Robert was so highly lauded: a dramatic and elegant architectural
setting; a charming narrative set within it; and a stunning sense
of warm light pervading through the entire scene. The dust kicked
up by the horses lends an air of romance and mystery to the
striking and beautiful scene.

"A highly finished drawing of this composition, almost certainly done
in preparation for this painting, was in the Bourgarel collection and
sold at Sotheby's Monaco, 5 December 1991, lot 13. The drawing is
inscribed, signed and dated on a stone slab center
left: Hubert obert/...Romae/1760, and a similar date may be
proposed for the present painting, whose canvas indeed appears to be
Italian. The figures come from
a circa 1730 painting by François Boucher, now in the
Springfield Museum of Fine Arts in Massachussetts; the painting was
engraved with the title Les
Voyageurs. Robert repeats the figures in a circular
painting that was until recently in the Metropolitan Museum of
Art. Signed and dated 1777 and paired with a
pendant The Old Bridge, the
Metropolitan picture depicts the figures emerging from a pathway
between two ruins of colonnaded buildings. The same site as the
present painting was used by Robert in another painting, this time with
two women riding a camel, formerly in the collection of the Comte de
Japonaise until sold at Sotheby's London, 6 March 1957, lot 160."

Detail of Lot 73

The
lot has a modest estimate of $200,000 to $300,000. It sold for $212,500.

Another
great Robert is Lot 68, "Grotta di Possillipo," an oil on earthenware
plate, 6 1/8 inches in diameter.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"On
October 29, 1793, at the beginning of the Terror, Hubert Robert
was arrested and jailed by the Revolutionary authorities for
having failed to renew his citizen's card. He was held
initially at the convent of Sainte-Pélagie and transferred, on the
night of January 30-31, 1794, to the seminary of Saint-Lazare, the site
of a former leper's house. He was not released until after the
fall of Robespierre in July of that year. While imprisoned, he
consoled himself by painting and drawing. Materials on which to
paint were scarce and he began to use the earthenware prison plates on
which his food was served as his 'canvases.' While some of these
plates depict scenes of life within the prison, the majority are
landscapes.

"The present painting depicts a group of figures in the Grotta di
Posillipo in Naples; its dark and dramatic lighting recalls the moody
prison scenes of Magnasco and Goya, as well as the
famous Carceri etchings by Piranesi. Robert spent a
little over a decade in Italy, and during that time completed a drawing
expedition to the southern city in 1760 with the Abbé de
Saint-Non, whom he met in Rome. Robert, a prolific artist, would
return to his sketches of Italy throughout his career for
inspiration in his paintings, though it is likely that the present work
(as it was painted while he was imprisoned) came from the artist's
memory."

Detail of Lot 68

The lot has an estimate of $60,000 to
$80,000. It sold for $75,000.

Lot 17, "Seascape with
fishermen and figures on a pier," by Jan van de Cappelle, oil on
canvas, 19 3/4 by 30 inches

Lot 17
is a very nice marine scene by Jan van de Cappelle (1625-1679) entitled
"Seascape with fishermen and figures on a pier." An oil on
canvas, it measures 19 3/4 by 30 inches.

The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"Jan
van de Cappelle's rare marine compositions stand out as high points in
the arch of Dutch Golden Age painting. This signed and dated example is
a particularly evocative and successful example of the calm, expansive
seascapes for which he is renowned. The view is from the water's edge,
looking across shallows in which fishermen are unloading small rowing
boats to the right, while in the center a group of sailing vessels are
tied together whilst similarly being unloaded. At the left is an
elevated dock with a group of onlookers conversing as a lone figure
attempts to climb to shore."
The lot has an estimate of $300,000 to $400,000. It failed to sell.

Lot
45, "Wooded evening landscape with a hunter and his dogs," by Jan
Wijnants and Adriaen van de Velde, oil on canvas, 59 7/8 by 75 1/4
inches

Lot 45, "Wooded evening landscape with a hunter and his dogs," is a
large oil on canvas by Jan
Wijnants (1632-1684) and Adriaen van de Velde (1636-1672). It
measures 59 7/8 by 75 1/4
inches. It once
belonged to Baron Anselm von Rothschild of Vienna and was subsequently
confiscated in 1938 and allocated to the Kunstmuseum Linz and then
repatriated to the Rothschilds and then selected as a donation to the
Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna in 1947 and then restored to the
Rothschilds in 1999 and then sold at Christie's in London for
$3,600,467.

The lot has an estimate of
$2,000,000 to $3,000,000. It
sold for $1,815,000.

Lot
66, "Extravagant architectural capriccio with a white barge on a
canal and Pharaoh's daughter finding Moses," is a large oil on canvas
by Francisco Gutierrez (active second half of 17th Century), 66 1/8 by
85 inches.
The catalogue provides the following commentary:

"This
painting is related to a group of works by the Spanish painter
Francisco Gutiérrez depicting biblical subjects set within grandiose
mannerist architectural settings. These include a set of six capriccios
depicting Joseph in Heliopolis, the Arc of the Covenant,
the Judgment of Solomon, Solomon and the Queen of Sheba,
the Betrothal of the Virgin, and Christ in the House of Simon
the Pharisee, all now in the Colegiata at Villagarcia de Campos
(Valladolid). In addition, three of these paintings are recorded
as signed on the reverse with the same monogram as that found on the
reverse of the present painting before it was relined. A similar
architectural capriccio by Gutiérrez, also including the Finding
of Moses, is in the Museum of Fine Arts, Bilbao and further examples of
his work are in the Prado, Madrid and the Museum of Fine
Arts, Seville.

"Little
is known about the details of Gutiérrez’s life. He was active in Madrid
and is probably the artist cited as 'Don Francisco Gutiérrez
Cavello, pintor' in 1662 in relation to the estate of one doña Maria
Pérez de Burgos. Stylistically, Gutierrez’s figure groups derive
from Juan de la Corte, but his complex architectural renderings betray
a likely knowledge of the engravings and designs from Northern and
Central Europe, particularly the work of Hans Vredeman de Vries (1527-circa
1606).

The
lot has an estimate of $175,000 to $225,000. It sold for $350,000.